Hi!
On powerpc64le-linux, we are in the middle of changing ABI of long double
from the IBM double double format
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadruple-precision_floating-point_format#Double-double_arithmetic
to IEEE 754 quad (aka binary128)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadruple-precision_floati
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 01:34:01PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Dwarf-Discuss wrote:
> Which brings another question, shouldn't we add
>
> DW_ATE_complex_int
>
> as a standard code?
Actually, we need to differentiate
DW_ATE_complex_signed_int
and
DW_ATE_complex_unsigned_int
Jakub
_
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 7:34 AM Jakub Jelinek via Dwarf-Discuss <
dwarf-discuss@lists.dwarfstd.org> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On powerpc64le-linux, we are in the middle of changing ABI of long double
> from the IBM double double format
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadruple-precision_floating-point_fo
On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 04:52:38PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> DW_ATE seems natural, since that's how we express the encoding of a base
> type. OTOH, using DW_AT_precision would parallel DW_AT_digit_count for
> fixed-point encodings. My concern is that it would be possible to have
> multiple al
+ John Reagan who can (I hope) speak to the choice of using different
ATE codes for distinguishing VAX/IEEE floats in OpenVMS.
--paulor
> -Original Message-
> From: Dwarf-Discuss On Behalf
> Of Jakub Jelinek via Dwarf-Discuss
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 5:17 PM
> To: Jason Merrill
>
